A Critique of The Comparative Study On The Analysis of Religious Freedom in Myanmar and Laos

A Critique of the Comparative Study on the Analysis of Religious Freedom
A CRITIQUE OF THE COMPARATIVE STUDY ON THE ANALYSIS OF RELIGIOUS

FREEDOM IN MYANMAR AND LAOS
Chris Za Bea Enate

Thapten Tello
BA Political Science IV
University of the Philippines Visayas
Mr. Clyde Ben Gacayan

Political Science 178
November 27, 2014
ABSTRACT
Religious freedom from the word itself is basically being free from any government
imposition of religion. It also means being free from the conditions of education, employment or
one's status in the political community (Secular Coalition for America, 2012). In Myanmar, there
are political reforms being made in order to improve the situation for freedom of religion and
belief, as sectarian violence and severe abuses of religious freedom continues to target ethnic
minorities (U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2013). On the other hand, Laos
provides freedom of religion as stated in their constitution, however, there are still violations on
religious minorities through detentions, surveillance, harassment, property confiscations, forced
relocations and renunciations of faith (U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom,
2013). The governments failure to conduct a proper investigation on this matter, has drawn
attention to broader concerns about the lack of respect for basic rights (Rogers, 2014).
A lot of comparative political analysis has generated insights and generalizations on
religious freedom in Myanmar and Laos, such as Theravada (In)tolerations in Myanmar, Thailand,
Cambodia, and Laos by Tomas Larsson (2013); Religious Legal Systems in Comparative Law by
Marylin Johnson Raisch (2013); and Monkish Politics in Southeast Asia: Religious
disenfranchisement in comparative and theoretical perspective by Tomas Larsson (2014).
However, both the authors have failed to address the definition of religious freedom as a means of
community identity. Also, there is a lack of conceptual understanding on the failure and
unwillingness of the government to conduct a proper investigation to fully curtail religious
freedom abuses, and to undertake steps to lessen violence and discrimination. This has worsened
the situation of the religious and ethnic minorities in achieving freedom in religion.
This study is a critical review of the frameworks used in the study of religious freedom on
the social dimension theory of comparative politics. This will make use of two studies available
by Benefict Rogers (2014) and the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
(2014). Moreover, it would inform merits, weaknesses and areas of improvement on how
comparativists work and in turn would produce images on how religious freedom are practiced
and implemented in Burma and Laos.
This paper can contribute to how comparative studies of religious freedom are
conceptualized in Myanmar and Laos.
INTRODUCTION
Derivation
Today, considerable changes are taking place in the structure and working of governments
all over the world. This, in turn, has necessitated a change in the approach to the study of
government and politics (Palekar, n.d.). The shift from government to politics was a device to
change the focus from institutions to processes. The boundaries of this discipline have expanded
inconceivably to the point of coopting disciplinary terrain belonging to both allied and foreign
disciplines as sociology, psychology, economics, mathematics, physical sciences and engineering
(Ray, n.d.).
Comparative government involves the study of different political systems with their
institutions and functions and comparative politics covers comparative governments and non
state politics. It also studies rule making, rule implementing and rule adjudicating (Palekar, n.d.).
Additionally, comparative politics is more than current events because it has been engaged in
vigorous debates about how one should study these incredible political events. In the twenty-first
century, predominating themes have included democratization, state and society relations, citizens
and civil society, and the role of economics in the formation of public policy. This is not to dismiss
entirely the study of individual countries but rather to deemphasize individual country studies in
in order to develop the conceptual and critical skills necessary for making rough generalizations
(Coston, et. al. 2007).
According to Samirendra Ray (n.d.), the term comparative politics is now favored in
place of comparative government. It indicates that the structure is not only focused on formal
governmental institutions or political organization but true to one of the dominant trends in
contemporary political science, emphasizes informal factors, the dynamic nature of political
process, the role of interest groups, and the impact of society and culture on politics. Comparative
politics now offers to study the political process and institutions in a totally comparative fashion
for the purpose of answering common problems and questions.
In connection, this paper will look into religious freedom in Myanmar and Laos as variables
of comparison in the two countries. In which the focus would be comparing both nations, not just
its institutions or structures but also it would allow a window for analysis outside of the statist
concerns, behavior and its economy. This resulted to the developments of new methods and
approaches, allowing both quantitative and qualitative methods to converse and opening a window
for value free functional studies and in depth analysis for cross countries examples (Gacayan,
2014).
Definition
Most of the major world religions and as much or more human diversity are from the East
and Southeast Asia than any other regions in the world. The role of religion in the modern nation
- states of Asia varies as well from one place to another. Other Asian nations are regularly criticized
for failing to protect religious freedom, especially that of the minorities. This context challenges
the idea that generalizations can be made about religious freedom in Asia. (Stephen Bailey, Jiexia
Zhai Autry, and Dennis R. Hoover, n.d.)
Religious freedom in general can be traced back for centuries ago. As stated by Allen D.
Hertzke (2012), claims that religious liberty is a Western construct, its threads weave their
way back to ancient Sumeria, Persia, China, and Africa. Some 2,500 years ago, as recorded in
history, Cyrus the Great established a broad regime of religious tolerance, which included restoring
freedom for Jewish exiles and allowing them to return to their homeland. In the words of the
Quran, there is no compulsion in religion (Hertzke, 2012).
Religious freedom is still a concept that is hard to grasp without any definite meaning. The
two (2) definitions were taken from two different authors that both have a different take about
what religious freedom means.
According to Jennifer Marshall (n.d.), religious freedom is the birthright of all people, a
fundamental human right that ought to be enjoyed by the people of all nations. This right is granted
not by government but by the Creator. By respecting it, the government acknowledges that such
ultimate issues are outside of its jurisdiction, and that conscience is answerable to a higher
authority than the law of the land. However, for Allan Hertzke (2012), religious freedom is a potent
human right that simultaneously encompasses the freedom of conscience and association, the right
to own property, to publicly worship, publish, speak, petition government, and raise children
according to family desires, which all of these are stated under the constitution.
Religion is relational, and true freedom of faith must protect the right of people to gather
in communities of belief for mutual expression and relief. Religious communities are historically
and ontologically prior to the modern state and their autonomy deserves protection from
overreaching political authorities. This shared aspiration serves as a powerful motivator, as family
life and social networks have deep roots in collective religious experience. Hence, a good society
is one in which persons can express their innate transcendent inclinations in public domains.
(Hertzke, 2012)
The level of religious freedom has improved in Laos during recent years. Over the past
decade, for example, there has been a reduction in the number of long-term Christian prisoners of
conscience and in the average length of sentence. In 2013, the government also took steps to
consult Protestant, Buddhist, Catholic, Bahai and Muslim leaders on the revision of the Prime
Minister's Decree on Management and Protection of Religious Activities (Decree 92) (Rogers,
2014). However, according to Christian Solidarity Worldwide (2012), numerous problems in the
area of religious freedom continue to exist even though the widespread illogical detentions of
religious leaders in preceding years have diminished considerably. The macro issue is the
weakness in the rule of law, with limited legal protections existing for religious activities and with
arbitrary approaches towards religion still being exercised at the local level. The major test of a
countrys commitment to freedom of religion or belief is its treatment of the religious minorities.
The trend in the Myanmar government with respect to the religious freedom did not change
significantly during the year. Despite the governments implementation for political and economic
reforms in order to improve many human rights, there are still some deficiencies in the protection
of the right to religious freedom. The government maintained restrictions on certain religious
activities and actively promoted Theravada Buddhism over other religions, particularly among the
ethnic minority populations (United States Department of State, 2012). The prerequisite in order
to be promoted to senior government and military ranks is the adherence or conversion to
Buddhism, although it is unwritten. Religious activities and organizations were subject to
restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly. The government continued to
monitor the meetings and activities of some organizations, including religious organizations.
Societal abuses and discrimination based on a mix of ethnicity and religious affiliation, belief, or
practice occurred. The U.S. government advocated religious freedom to all sectors of the society,
including government officials, religious leaders, private citizens, scholars, diplomats of other
governments, international business and media representatives. U.S. officials traveled to other
ethnic border regions of Burma on numerous occasions, to offer support to local nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) and religious leaders, including through small grants and training programs,
and relaying information to human rights NGOs and religious leaders. Since 1999, Burma has
been designated as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) under the International Religious
Freedom Act for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations or abuses of religious
freedom. The U.S. government maintains specific sanctions against the country for its violations
of religious freedom (United States Department of State, 2011).
Development
All around the world, individuals were subjected to discrimination, violence and abuse,
perpetrated and sanctioned violence for simply exercising their faith, identifying with a certain
religion, or choosing not to believe in a higher deity at all (United States Department of State,
2013).
According to Christian Solidarity Worldwide (2009), Laos is a signatory to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and should be urged to ratify the
ICCPR. Article 18 of their Constitution provides that, Everyone shall have the right to freedom
of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion
or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public
or in private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
However, domestic law in Laos concerning freedom of religion is very limited and fails to
guarantee international standards. Additionally, the macro context of Laos governance, with the
weakness of its rule of law, is a significant factor in the violations of religious freedom experienced
in Laos, and is therefore a critical issue to address.
According to Christian Solidarity Worldwide (2009), the notion that Christianity

constitutes a threat to national homogeneity is demonstrated in common accusations against
Christians that they belong to a foreign religion which is not proper to Laos; this perception reflects
a fear of Christianity as a threat. Opposition to Protestantism is mediated not only through the
government, but in societal prejudices. Rather than being subject to the rule of law, the levels of
religious freedom experienced across the country are typically informed by the approaches of the
current local officials. The impetus for harassing or persecuting a Christian community typically
originates from any of a variety of authorities, either within a village, or at a higher level. This
enhances the vulnerability of Christians to arbitrary mistreatment. During recent years, one of the
most common forms of persecution has been the forcible eviction of Christian communities from
hostile villages. It is imperative that the government of Laos should take the steps of ratifying the
ICCPR and implement its provisions for religious freedom; undertaking to prevent the forcible
eviction of Christian communities and forcible renunciations of faith, and to ensure that such
infringements of religious freedom are properly investigated and punished; and expressing concern
about the inadequacy of current legislative protections for freedom of religion, and call for this to
be addressed (Christian Solidarity Worldwide, 2009).
Furthermore, although Myanmars overall human rights record continued to improve,
organized anti-Muslim hate speech, harassment, and discrimination against Muslims continued,
exploited by those seeking to divide and pit Buddhist and Muslim communities against one
another, often for political gain (United States Department of State, 2013). Discrimination on the
basis of religious identity continued to be a serious issue throughout the country. Christian villagers
in a remote part of southern Chin State reported threats to burn down their village if they continued
10
to assemble for Christian worship, made by local government officials (Chin Human Rights
Organization, 2014).
Most religious freedom violations occurred against ethnic minority Christian and Muslim
communities, with serious abuses against mainly Christian civilians during military interventions
in Kachin State and sectarian violence by societal actors targeting Muslims in Rakhine (Arakan)
State. In addition to sometimes severe restrictions on worship, education, and other religious
activities and ceremonies, religious groups continue to face a range of problems, including:
pervasive surveillance, imprisonment, discrimination, societal violence, destruction or desecration
of property, and censorship of religious materials. Moreover, the Rohingya Muslims, who are
denied Burmese citizenship, experience widespread discrimination, strict controls over their
religious activities and ceremonies and societal violence that is often incited by Buddhist monks
and carried out with impunity by mobs and local militias, including police in Rakhine (Arakhan)
State (United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2013).
Article 34 of their constitution states that, Every citizen is equally entitled to freedom of
conscience and the right to freely profess and practice religion subject to public order, morality or
health and to other provisions of this Constitution. Article 354 states that, every citizen shall be
at libertyif not contrary to the laws, enacted for Union security, prevalence of law and order,
community peace and tranquilityto develop religion and customs without prejudice to the
relations between one national race and another or among national races to other faiths. Article
364 forbids the abuse of religion for political purposes and bars religious leaders from running
for political office and members of religious orders from voting. Nevertheless, in practice,
Burmas overall human rights record remains poor and the government was either unable or
unwilling to curtail security forces or social actors who engaged in serious abuses against religious
11
minorities and others during armed conflicts in Kachin State and sectarian violence in Rakhine
(Arakan) State. The constitution and laws continue to restrict religious freedom (United States
Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2013).
They should ensure that the perpetrators of human rights violations are brought to justice
(Human Rights Council, 2013). Also, make accountable the state or non-state actors who
perpetrated acts of violence against religious and ethnic minorities (United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom, 2013).
Methods
Robert Dahl formulated a theory based on a wide dispersion of power and authority among
government officials, groups, and individuals. He understood the structure of power as segmented,
not organized into a hierarchical pattern. He envisaged society as comprising polyarchies in which
barriers to political opposition are not substantial and subsystem autonomy and organizational
pluralism prevail in a milieu of consensus and order, constraints on violence, and equilibrium.
Dahl later elaborated on his theory, arguing that socialist economies can be highly decentralized
and pluralistic. (Chilcote, 2000)
Incorporating the theory with the current status of both Myanmar and Laos with Dahls
theory, it can be viewed that there is a conflict of power between two groups; the majority and
minority religious groups. In the case of Myanmar, the majority religious group are the ones
following Buddhism while the minority group is composed of Rohingya Muslim people. In Laos
on the other hand, the majority religion is Buddhism while its minority counterpart is Christian
Protestant.
12
It shows that there has been severe violence between the two groups, especially that of the
religious and ethnic minorities, in both countries as a product of religious and cultural diversity.
This had a profound effect on how the majorities, including the government treat the minorities.
This had caused disruption in the stability of the country as a whole in which both parties possess
powers that can influence or provoke each other, the government and even the international realm.
13
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
A CRITIQUE OF THE COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS ON THE RELIGIOUS
FREEDOM IN MYANMAR AND LAOS
United States Commission on International

Religious Freedom (2014)
Benedict Rogers (2014)
His comparison is more of a legal perspective that

the religious freedom in Myanmar and Laos.
It is considered by many people and nations

to be a fundamental human right in which it
is generally considered to mean that the
government permits religious practices of
other minority groups besides the state
religion
The approach to religious freedom depends on

a persons free will whether to subscribe to a
religion or not.
Religious freedom as the right of all human

beings to think as they please, believe or not
believe as their conscience leads, and live out
their beliefs openly, peacefully, and without
fear.
THEORETICAL CRITIQUE
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The study first explains the origin of religious freedom, its definition and how it developed through
the years in both Myanmar and Laos. Then it will analyze the frameworks used by the two authors
namely, Benedict Rogers (2014) and the United States Commission on International Religious
Freedom (2014), in comparing the religious freedom in the two countries. With the different
approaches used by the authors, this will then be subjected to a theoretical critique in order to
determine the implications of their findings and what would it recommend to lessen the violence
and discrimination. Also, this will give an idea on how the government should better address the
preservation of the freedom in religion and upholding of human rights.
14
Review of Related Literature

In tracing the root of religious freedom in its sense, Hertz (2012) stated that, religious
freedom in general can be traced back for centuries ago. Claims that religious liberty is a Western
construct, it threads weave their way back to ancient Sumeria, Persia, China and Africa. Some
2,500 years ago, as recorded in history. Cyrus the Great established a broad regime of religious
tolerance which included restoring freedom for Jewish exiles and allowing them to return to their
homeland. In the words of the Quran, there is no compulsion in religion.
According to the FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) Human Rights Annual Report
(2007), freedom of religion or belief is far-reaching and profound. It encompasses not just the
freedom to hold personal thoughts and convictions, but also being able to manifest them
individually or with others, publicly or in private. It also includes the freedom to subscribe to
different schools of thought within a religion, and to change ones religion or beliefs. It forbids
discrimination against individuals who have, or wish to have, different beliefs. It prohibits the use
of coercion to make someone hold or change their religion or belief.
As stated by Marshall (2014), Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of the American
experiment. That is because religious faith is not merely a matter of toleration but is understood
to be the exercise of inherent national rights. For Reese (2014), the first point to be made is that
religious freedom is not just for believers. It also includes nonbelievers. Properly speaking, it is
"freedom of religion or belief." It protects a person's right to hold or not hold any religion or belief.
So religious freedom must also protect the atheist. Nor is it only for religious minorities. It also
applies to those of the majority who might want to debate or dissent from views within the majority
religion. As a fundamental human right, freedom of religion is important to believers and
nonbelievers. Yet where freedom of religion is not respected, we see conflict and even bloodshed.
15
Conflicts over religion can destabilize nations, cause economic uncertainty, and provide a breeding
ground for terrorists. As a result, freedom of religion should be a priority.
Religious Freedom in Myanmar and Laos
According to Rogers (2014), Freedom of religion or belief is a touchstone for human
rights standards: many aspects are inseparable from the right to freedom of expression, freedom
of assembly, freedom of movement and other fundamental rights and freedoms. It is therefore
essential that the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, as a potential Human Rights Council
candidate and a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ensures that
international standards on the right to freedom of religion or belief are upheld in law and in
practice.
According to the Annual Report presented by the U.S. Commission on International
Religious Freedom (2014), the Laos governments toleration of religious activity continues to
vary by region, ethnicities and religious groups. Buddhism which is deeply embedded in Lao
culture and state functions is practiced by the majority of the population, is now generally free
from restrictive oversight. In Burma on the other hand, political reforms have not improved legal
protections for religious freedom and have done little to curtail anti-Muslim violence, incitement
and discriminating, particularly targeting the Rohingya Muslim minority. Police failed to intervene
effectively and the government has taken inadequate steps to address the underlying causes of
sectarian violence or hold individuals fully accountable.
According to Bailey (n.d), Laos recognizes only Buddhism, Islam, Catholic Church, Lao
Evangelical church, the Lao Seventh day Adventist Church and the Bahai religion. As stated in
Article 9 of their constitution, it respects and protects all lawful activities of the Buddhists and of
16
followers of other religions and mobilizes and encourages Buddhist monks and novices as well as
the priests of other religions to participate in activities that are beneficial to the country and its
people. However, all acts creating division between religions and classes of people are prohibited.
Comparatively in Burma, Bailey (n.d) stated that, Burma recognizes a special relationship with
Buddhism. Article 362 of its constitution, states that the Union also recognizes Christianity, Islam,
Hinduism and Animism as religions existing in the Union at the day of the coming into operation
of this Constitution. And under Article 34, every citizen is equally entitled to freedom of
conscience and the right to freely profess and practice religion subject to public order, morality or
health and to the other provisions of this Constitution.
In Rogers (2014) Hearing the Worldwide Persecution of Christians, the author provided
a description of the changes that Laos and Burma undergone in the recent years. In the case of
Laos, it had showed improvement in religious freedom in recent years. There has been a reduction
in the number of long-term Christian prisoners of conscience and in the average length of sentence.
However, there are continuing reports of religious freedom violation. These violations include
disruption of religious meetings and services; restricted freedom of movement; discrimination in
the distribution of food and school supplies; blocking of access to education; withdrawal of
utilities; destruction of livestock and other property; forced participation in animist ceremonies;
and threats, including death threats.
Comparatively, Burma had also shown some extraordinary changes in the past two years
or more. Nevertheless, there is still a very long way to go, and in relation to freedom of religion,
there have in fact been setbacks, with a severe and dramatic rise in anti-Muslim hatred and
violence, affecting firstly the Rohingya Muslim people, and then the wider Burmese Muslim
community. Both CSW (Christian Solidarity Worldwide) and CHRO (Chin Human Rights
17
Organization) have documented serious violations of freedom of religion or belief affecting

Christians in Burma, notably: the destruction of crosses in Chin and Kachin states, and the
militarys role in forcing Chin Christians to build Buddhist pagodas in place of crosses; forcible
or coerced conversion of Chin Christians to Buddhism within military-run schools known as Na
Ta La (Rogers, 2014).
However, as stated by the United States Department of State (2012), the trend of Myanmar
did not change significantly despite the governments effort in implementing considerable political
and economic reforms in order to improve human rights, there are still some deficiencies in respect
for and protection of the right to religious freedom. The government maintained restrictions on
certain religious activities and actively promoted Theravada Buddhism over other religions,
particularly among the ethnic minority populations.
Burmas overall human rights record remains poor and the government was either unable
or unwilling to curtail security forces or social actors who engaged in serious abuses against
religious minorities and others during armed conflicts in Kachin State and sectarian violence in
Rakhine (Arakan) State. Rohingya Muslims, who are denied Burmese citizenship, experience
widespread discrimination, strict controls over their religious activities and ceremonies and
societal violence that is often incited by Buddhist monks and carried out with impunity by mobs
and local militias, including police in Rakhine (Arakhan) State (United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom, 2013).
Government Restrictions
As stated by Rogers (2014), the governments failure to conduct a proper investigation, has
drawn attention to broader concerns about the lack of respect for basic rights.
18
According to the United States Department of State (2012), it showed that there are
numerous problems in the area of religious freedom that continue to exist even though detentions
of religious leaders have diminished considerably. The macro issue is the weakness in the rule of
law, with limited legal protections existing for religious activities and with arbitrary approaches
towards religion still being exercised at the local level. The major test of a countrys commitment
to freedom of religion or belief is its treatment of the religious minorities.
Moreover, the constitution and some laws and policies protect religious freedom; however,
enforcement of these laws and policies at the district and local levels was mixed. Other laws and
policies restricted this right in practice, and the government generally enforced these restrictions.
The government demonstrated a slight trend toward improvement in respect for and protection of
the right to religious freedom through ongoing outreach to the provinces to educate the population
on religious freedom (United States Department of State, 2011)
In Myanmar, the military reportedly continues to limit religious worship and forcibly
promote Buddhism as a means of pacification in these areas and targets Christians for forced labor,
rape, intimidation, and destruction of religious sites. The government also continues to censor
religious publications and prohibits the import of Bibles and Qurans in indigenous languages
(United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2013).
Also, the government imposed restrictions on certain religious activities and limited
freedom of religion, although it generally permitted adherents of government-registered religious
groups to worship as they chose. There was no change in the government's limited degree of
respect for religious freedom during the reporting period. Religious activities and organizations
were subject to restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly. The government
continued to monitor meetings and activities of virtually all organizations, including religious
19
organizations, and required religious groups to seek permission from authorities before holding
any large public event. The government continued to restrict systematically the efforts of Buddhist
clergy to promote human rights and political freedom.
The constitution and other laws and policies restrict religious freedom. The government
implemented considerable political reforms, but did not demonstrate a trend toward either
improvement or deterioration in respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom. The
government maintained restrictions on certain religious activities and limited freedom of religion,
although it generally permitted adherents of government-registered religious groups to worship as
they chose. While constraints on respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom
continued, the community of Christian churches reported a notable easing of restrictions on church
building and a positive relationship with the Ministry of Religion, including the ministrys
organization of interfaith dialogues (United States Department of State, 2011).
Methodological Framework
According to Bailey (n.d), most of the world religions are from the East and Southeast of
Asia. The role of religion in the modern nation-states varies from one place to another. Other Asian
nations are regularly criticized for failing to protect religious freedom, especially of the minorities.
This context challenges the idea that generalizations can be made about religion freedom in Asia.
In the works of Abdelkader (n.d) and Henne (2012), they had presented frameworks in
their works that examines the context of religious freedom. According to Henne (2012), a
Religious Freedom sourcebook was designed in order to aid interested parties in exploring the
complex relationship between religious freedom and violent religious extremism in which he
provided selected annotated bibliography of scholarly works, a listing of useful data sets,
20
suggestions for further reading, and a bibliography of sources cited. On the other hand Abdelkader
(n.d) had examined the experiences of Rohingya Muslim in its historical context where he had
examined it through contemporary humanitarian and human rights lens.
According to Bielefeldt (2014), in order to enable the Special Rapporteur to respond more
effectively to the information they had developed a framework for communications. This
framework sets out the different types of cases or situations that are submitted to her and are within
the scope of her mandate, along with the corresponding international standards relevant to each
issue. The Special Rapporteur has indicated on a number of occasions that one of the main focuses
of her activities is the protection aspect of the right of individuals to freedom of religion or belief.
Accordingly, the use of communications to engage with Governments on allegations of violations
of individual rights is vitally important.
According to Chin Human Rights Organization (2014), information is collected by
CHROs fieldworkers in accordance with documentation guidelines produced by the Network for
Human Rights Documentation Burma, of which CHRO is a member. Due to the challenges and
difficulties with human rights documentation, especially in Chin State, this briefing should be
viewed as an emblematic rather than comprehensive account of all issues of freedom of religion
or belief affecting the Chin.
In conclusion, it shows that the government of involved countries; Myanmar and Laos have
failed to promote religious freedom under their jurisdiction. So there is a need for the international
community to step in. There is a need to focus on studies regarding religious freedom and consider
it as a key issue in human rights so that the international community can, at some point, help in
addressing current issues.
21
REFERENCES
Books/Journals:
Abdekar, E. (n.d). The Rohingya Muslim in Myanmar: Past, present and future. Retrieved from
law.uoregon.edu/org/oril/doc/15-1/Abdelkader.pdf last October 2, 2014
Bailey, S. et al. (n.d.) Religious Freedom Research and the Future of Asian Studies. Retrieved
from http://globalengage.org/documents/syllabi/Bailey-and-Autry_Model-Syllabus.pdf
last 18 Sep 2014
Bielefeldt, H. Et al (2014) Rapporteurs Digest on Freedom of Religion or Belief p. 4 Retrieved
from
http://www.ohchr.org/documents/issues/religion/rapporteursdigestfreedomreligionbelief.
pdf last 09 Oct 2014
Chilcote, R. (2000). Comparative Inquiry in Politics and Political Economy: Theories and
Issues. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [Questia] [216 pp.]
Chin Human Rights Organization (2014) Thematic Briefing: The state of freedom of religion or
belief
for
Chin
in
Burma/Myanmar
2013
p.
Retrieved
from
http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs17/CHRO-FoRB-2013-en.pdf last 09 Oct 2014

Chin Human Rights Organization. (2014). The state of freedom of religion or belief for Chin in
Burma/Myanmar 2013. Retrieved from http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs17/CHROFoRB-2013-en.pdf last October 7, 2014
Christian Solidarity Worldwide. (2009). LAO PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
Retrieved from
http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session8/LA/CSW_UPR_LAO_S08_20
10_ChristianSolidarityWorldwide.pdf last October 7, 2014
Christian Solidarity Worldwide. (2012). Laos Religious freedom report. Retrieved
http://www.cswusa.org/filerequest/2864.pdf last September 18, 2014
Davis, J. (n.d) The Promise of Potential Retrieved from
http://www.jodidavis.com/pdfs/excerpt_identity.pdf last November 13, 2014
FCO Human Rights Annual Report. (2007). Freedom of Religion or Belief - how the FCO can
help
promote
respect
for
this
human
right.
Retrieved
from
22
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/35443/free
dom-toolkit.pdf last October 9, 2014
Gacayan, C. (2014). Development, Scope and Thrust. Unpublished Discussion. September 1,
2014
Hertzke, A. (2012). Religious Freedom in the World Today: Paradox and Promise Universal
Rights in a World of Diversity. The Case of Religious Freedom Pontifical Academy of
Social Science. Retrieved from
www.pass.va/content/dam/scienzesociali/pdf/acta17/acta17-hertzke.pdf last September
18, 2014
Human Rights Council. (2013). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human
rights in Myanmar, Toms Ojea Quintana. Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/MM/A-HRC-22-58.pdf last October 7, 2014
Marshall, J. (n.d.). Why Does Religious Freedom Matter?.Understanding America. Retrieved
from thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2010/pdf/ReligiousFreedom.pdf last September 18,
2014
United States Department of State. (2011). International Religious Freedom Report for 2011.
Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/192827.pdf last September
18, 2014
Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/208324.pdf last September
18, 2014
Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/222225.pdf last October 7,
2014
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. (2013). Annual Report of the
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. Retrieved from
http://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/resources/2013%20USCIRF%20Annual%20Rep
ort%20(2).pdf last October 7, 2014
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. (2014). Laos. Retieved from
http://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/Laos%202014.pdf last September 18, 2014
23
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. (2014). Annual Report.

Retrieved
from
http://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/Burma%202014_0.pdf
last
September 18, 2014

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. (2014). ANNUAL
REPORT00202014. Retrieved from
http://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/USCIRF%202014%20Annual%20Report%20PD
F.pdf last November 13, 2014
ONLINE SOURCES:
Coston, K., et. Al. (2007). Comparative Government and Politics Teachers Guide. Retrieved
from
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/repository/ap07_compgopo_teachersguid
e.pdf last October 4, 2014
Hertz, K. (2012). Religious Freedom in the World Today: Paradox and Promise. Retrieved
from http://www.pass.va/content/dam/scienzesociali/pdf/acta17/acta17-hertzke.pdf last
September 18, 2014
Henne, P. et. Al. (2012). Religious Freedom and Violent Religious Extremism: A Sourcebook of
Modern Cases and Analysis. Retrieved from berkleycenter.georgetown.edu last
September 18, 2014
Hurd, E.S (2013) Religious Difference and Religious Freedom Retrieved from
http://blogg.uio.no/prosjekter/plurel/content/religious-difference-and-religious-freedom
last November 13, 2014
Lanham: Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. (2014). House foreign affairs
subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International
Organizations Hearing. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1498090733?accountid=47253 last September 18,
2014
Marshall,
J.
(2014).
Why
Does
Religious
Freedom
Matter.
Retrieve
from
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/12/why-does-religious-freedom-matter last
September 18, 2014
24
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. (2002).Religious repression widespread in china. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/261660973?accountid=47253 last 17 Sept 2014
Palekar, S. (n.d.). Comparative Politics and Government. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=0J7Q60bJkkIC&pg=PA328&lpg=PA328&dq=co
mparative%2Bgovernment%2Bshift%2Bto%2Bcomparative%2Bpolitics&source=bl&ots
=MK5y705Jc0&sig=qyfBNT4PDlBKr7GCIhphMYQ3s4E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kSYxVKe
AEcr28QXx_oJg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=comparative%2Bgovernment
%2Bshift%2Bto%2Bcomparative%2Bpolitics&f=false last October 4, 2014
Ray, S. (n.d.). MODERN COMPARATIVE POLITICS: APPROACHES, METHODS AND
ISSUES. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=tVIooDXXbSQC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=compa
rative%2Bgovernment%2Bshift%2Bto%2Bcomparative%2Bpolitics&source=bl&ots=pJ
kQJ2GYfu&sig=pOJD7cf8ljHa_4s8MeDkcLEMxu4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kSYxVKeAEcr
28QXx_oJg&ved=0CE0Q6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=comparative%2Bgovernment%2Bsh
ift%2Bto%2Bcomparative%2Bpolitics&f=false last October 4, 2014
Reese, T. (2014). Religious freedom is a fundamental human right. Retrieved from
http://ncronline.org/blogs/faith-and-justice/religious-freedom-fundamental-human-right
October 9, 2014
Secular Coalition for America. (2012). Special Rights for Religion. Retrieve from
https://secular.org/issues/rfra/position last October 7, 2014
Traer, R. (1991) Religious Freedom: A Community Right Retrieved from
http://religionhumanrights.com/Law/ICCPR/community.rt.htm last November 13, 2014

A Critique of The Comparative Study On The Analysis of Religious Freedom in Myanmar and Laos

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Critique of The Comparative Study On The Analysis of Religious Freedom in Myanmar and Laos

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Critique of the Comparative Study on the Analysis of Religious Freedom